A different theory of cancer

A different theory of cancer

by Jon Rappoport

March 7, 2018

“The scrambling of chromosomes is so massive that no two cancer cells are identical. This means there is no typical cancer cell for vaccines or drugs to target and drug resistance is inevitable. All this without gene mutations.” (David Rasnick, PhD, former mainstream researcher, who has now become an outsider.)

A theory to explain the failure of the war on cancer? A theory that indicates in simple terms why mainstream treatments fail? A door that could open up on new alternative treatments?

There is a fascinating book-in-progress by chemist David Rasnick, PhD. It proposes a quite different view of cancer.

Here is an excerpt from David’s bio: “The past 21 years I have studied cancer from a completely new perspective. Prior to that, I worked in the pharmaceutical/biotech industries developing drugs against cancer, emphysema, arthritis, and parasites.”

“I…synthesized the first peptidyl-fluoromethanes. These molecules are…used around the world in the development of therapies for the tissue-destroying diseases of arthritis, cancer, and parasites, among others.”

David presents an explanation of cancer by tracing the cause to CHROMOSOME MALFUNCTION—which is a major departure from the current GENE-MUTATION hypothesis.

Merriam-Webster: “[A gene is] a unit of DNA that is usually located on a chromosome and that controls the development of one or more traits and is the basic unit by which genetic information is passed from parent to offspring.”

Vocabulary.com: “A chromosome is a strand of DNA that is encoded with genes. In most cells, humans have 22 pairs of these chromosomes plus the two sex chromosomes…”

David writes: “Cancer is a disease of the chromosomes! This simple understanding changes everything—from prevention to diagnosis to treatment. It explains spontaneous remission, inevitable drug resistance, and strongly supports alternatives to radiation and chemotherapy. It can help you and your family make better informed choices.”

David is raising funds for the purpose of completing his book. You can go to his Indiegogo site and watch David explain his cancer research, and if so moved, make a contribution.

I asked David to make a few comments about his new work—now that he has moved from the scientific mainstream to an “outsider” position. Here are his remarks:

“The biggest mark against [gene] mutations causing cancer is that every attempt to experimentally, or any other way, to prove it has failed. Second, basing diagnosis and treatment on the gene theory have failed to reduce the incidence of cancer and mortality. Third, theoretical and experimental proof that unbalanced chromosomes cause cancer continues to amass. So far, the chromosomal imbalance theory has successfully explained everything we know about cancer: how it starts and progresses over years to decades, its physical and behavioral characteristics, inevitable drug resistance, the impossibility of a vaccine against cancer…”

“Anything that becomes entrenched is difficult to replace. The trillion dollars spent on the gene centric war on cancer has created a mighty citadel. Huge egg in the face of government, drug companies, academics and opinion leaders to say whoops folks, sorry, we got it wrong.”

“Unbalanced chromosomes completely disrupt the species specific and tissue specific location of chromosomes. The chromosomes still orchestrate the production of proteins but in bizarre and uncoordinated ways. Again, without mutation of genes.”

“…there is an overall gain in chromosomes as…unbalanced cells divide over a period of years to decades. The amount of protein in a cell is proportional to the number of chromosomes, which means that cancer cells have considerably more protein than normal cells. The extra protein leads to the secretion of very dangerous digestive enzymes and other proteins responsible for invasion of adjacent tissues and metastasis.”

“The scrambling of chromosomes is so massive that no two cancer cells are identical. This means there is no typical cancer cell for vaccines or drugs to target and drug resistance is inevitable. All this without gene mutations.”

“The chromosomal imbalance theory changes everything about cancer. It offers young researches a very powerful and productive alternative to the hopelessly failed gene mutation theory.”


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Australia: marijuana doctor arrested for helping children

Australia: marijuana doctor arrested for helping children

The Australian underground is growing

by Jon Rappoport

June 5, 2017

Crazzfiles.com has the story (5/31):

“Dr Andrew Katelaris, will appear in the Hornsby Local Court today after being arrested yesterday.”

“Chief Inspector David Hogg confirmed to Echonetdaily that Dr. Katelaris had been charged with a number of offences including drug possession, having an indictable quantity of cannabis, and having proceeds of crime.”

“On Sunday Dr Katelaris featured in a Channel Seven report in which he was shown giving cannabis oil to a four-year-old boy, who has since been taken from his parents.”

“He had spent the weekend at a Hemp Industry forum at Rosehill in Sydney, where police arrived on the final day after reports that a large crop of cannabis was on display.”

“No arrests were made as the ‘cannabis display’, which consisted of low-THC plants for hemp production, had been approved prior to the forum.”

“Dr Katelaris has been a staunch advocate of medical cannabis, having been researching its effects since 1990.”

“He has been arrested numerous times in the past and openly admits to supplying CBD dominant cannabis to over 50 children with serious seizure disorders.”

“Just last year the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) determined Dr Katelaris, who also holds a doctorate, had been involved in more breaches of a code of conduct for non-registered health professionals after injecting two women with cannabis oil to treat ovarian cancer.”

At crazzfiles.com you can watch a short video featuring Dr. Katelaris and make up your own mind about his sincerity, skill, and competence.

The numerous government attacks against him are inevitably based on the fact that marijuana is a natural substance, and can’t be patented in that form. Having an effective medicine floating around that people can freely use for themselves contradicts the goals of the pharmaceutical money machine:

“We know what’s good for you, and what’s not good for you. The government has given us a monopoly on healing, and you’d better go along with it.”

Yes, even if a medicine kills you, it’s still the best that “science” can offer at the present moment.

And by the way, parents have no say in how their children are treated. They have no inherent rights. The government owns those children. As proof, if health authorities don’t like what the parents are doing, they can come in and take the children away and put them in foster care, where they’ll be drugged up to their eyeballs.

Medically speaking, Australia is on lockdown. The majority of citizens appear to be unaware or unconcerned. But those who are aware are looking for, and using, alternatives. They are forming a growing underground.

The Australian government is advised to study the history of police states. In the long run, they fail. People will stand for only so much, particularly when their health and the health of their children are on the line.

The police state appears to be invincible…until one day it isn’t, because huge numbers of people, who have been dealing with their very survival, outflank totalitarian departments and bureaus.

The top-down control factor disintegrates. A belittled and minimized impulse re-emerges.

It’s called freedom.

It turns out that the “market” in freedom is forever.

The mind never forgets it.


Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Would the government let Jesus cure cancer?

by Jon Rappoport

May 23, 2017

(To join our email list, click here.)

As I’ve been telling you for years, it’s easy to keep the public on your side if you regularly tout medical “breakthroughs” in the press. The latest innovation. The promise of a cure around the corner. The maybe-could-be discovery that will change the course of disease treatment forever.

In this case, a start-up called Tilos has one of those, for cancer. They say it’s an antibody their researchers came across while looking for a cure for MS. They stumbled on to it by accident. Aha.

Somehow, this antibody helps the immune system to recognize and wipe out cancer cells. It produces “a memory” in immune-system cells, and they are ready to go to war when cancer arrives. Or something. It’s hard to say.

The people at Tilos are, naturally, very enthusiastic.

So forthwith, I give you an assignment. Keep track of stories about this amazing antibody as time passes, and see whether it ever a) becomes a real cancer treatment, and b) does any good. Or c) disappears down the memory hole, never to be heard from again. I’m betting on c. Why? Because I’ve watched a number of these flashes dim out quickly and recede into nowhere land. And because, in this case, the company is very far from being able to fashion the antibody into a ground-level treatment. Of course, it’s possible that, on the basis of the recent gaudy announcement, Tilos could pick up some investor funding, but funding isn’t a disease treatment the last time I looked.

On the other hand, if a non-pharmaceutical company or researcher actually makes a promising discovery in cancer treatment (read about the troubles of Dr. Stan Burzynski, Dr. Willam Koch, Royal Rife, etc.), all hell breaks loose. The press immediately pounces on the researcher as if he’s working on an H-bomb in his basement. He must be an outright quack and charlatan, “because they all are.”

Corporate drug outfit=potential breakthrough.

Independent non-pharmaceutical researcher=Dr. Nazi.

Good press vs. bad press comes down to: how much can you pay; who do you know; how much advertising can you afford to buy; what official expert can you bring on board to vouch for you; is your product a drug rather than a detested natural non-patentable substance; can you do officially recognized clinical trials; are you connected with a favored group (university, research foundation, federal facility, pharma lab) who can obtain publication in a well-known medical journal.

Or are you a dreaded INDEPENDENT?

In the 1990s, I watched a federal trial in a Los Angeles courtroom. The defendant was charged with selling medical drugs without a license to practice medicine.

The defendant was prepared to argue that a) the substance he was selling was naturally produced in the body and b) it was effective.

The prosecution moved to exclude such testimony, on the grounds that it was irrelevant.

The judge agreed. Therefore, the trial was nasty, brutish, and short. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to prison for several years.

This is how the federal bureaucracy operates. “Do you have a government-issued license to heal? No? You’re a criminal.”

I believe that if Jesus of Nazareth were walking the Earth today, in the United States, he would be arrested on the same grounds.

This would be particularly so if he were curing cancer.

Imagine this extreme case: in a stadium packed with 50,000 people who have been diagnosed with cancer, Jesus of Nazareth waves his hand and cures all of them in a few seconds.

Now he is threatening the profits of many companies, to say nothing of the power of the government, which backs the chemo-radiation-surgery monopoly to the hilt.

So he is arrested. He is put on trial. He opts to defend himself without an attorney. He tells the court that curing cancer is no crime.

The prosecuting attorney objects. “Your Honor,” he says, “whether or not this man has cured cancer is beside the point. He has no license to practice medicine. That is why we are here today. We are simply establishing that a) he was practicing medicine and b) he has no government-issued license. That is the scope of this proceeding.”

The judge agrees. The verdict is issued. Guilty.

Of course, on another front, the major media, who depend for their existence on pharmaceutical advertising, take the ball and run with it. The networks and major newspapers seek out “experts,” who emphatically state that what Jesus of Nazareth “performed” in the stadium was mere hypnotism. It was all a placebo effect. Whatever sudden “remissions” may have occurred are just temporary. Tragically, the cancers will return.

Not only that, these 50,000 people have effectively been sidetracked and diverted from seeking “real care from real doctors.” With chemo, with radiation, with surgery, they would have stood a chance of surviving and living long normal lives.

Other media pundits send up this flag: “Many of those present in the stadium were bitter clingers to their religion. They refuse to accept science. They are living in the past. They favor superstition over real medical care. In fact, they are threatening the whole basis of healthcare, since other confused and deluded Americans may now turn away from doctors and seek snake-oil salesmen and preachers for healing.”

From the highest perches of political power in this country, the word quietly goes out to the media: don’t follow up on those people who were in the stadium; don’t try to track them; don’t compile statistics on their survival rates; move on to other stories (distractions); let this whole madness die down.

But among the citizenry, an awareness spreads: the government is controlling healing through its issuance of licenses. That’s how the government is essentially protecting one form of “healing” and enabling it to become an all-encompassing cartel.

What would be the alternative or the adjunct to licenses?

Contracts.

Contracts are agreements entered into by consenting adults, who assume responsibility for the outcomes. In the case of healing, a contract would specify that people have a right to be wrong.

Let’s say two consenting adults, Jim and Frank, agree to allow Frank to treat Jim for his arthritis with water from a well on Frank’s land.

The two men acknowledge that no liability will be attached to the outcome. In other words, whether Jim get better or gets worse, no one is going file a suit. No one is going to go to the government for redress of wrongs.

The well water may be wonderful or it may be completely useless. Both men understand and acknowledge that. But they assert a right to try the treatment, because they are free.

Immediately people say, “This is ridiculous. Water can’t cure arthritis. Frank is cheating Jim. Jim is a victim. He needs to see a doctor. He needs to go on arthritis drugs.”

No, Jim doesn’t have to do anything. He is free.

To put it another way, Jim has the right to be right or wrong. It’s his decision, which is beyond the scope of any authority.

If government tries to remove that right from all of us, it is essentially saying it knows what is correct, it knows what is true, it knows what we need and require, and it’s going to give it to us even if it has to shove it down our throats. Does that sound like freedom to you?

If Jesus of Nazareth lived in the United States today, and if he went around curing cancer, he would be arrested. He wouldn’t be charged with blasphemy or treason. He would be charged with something much simpler and more mundane: practicing medicine without a license.

And he would be convicted and sentenced.

Because then and now, the government, in its throne of corruption, wants to protect its proprietary and illegal interests.


Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

England’s failure in the war on cancer: lunacy on parade

England’s failure in the war on cancer: lunacy on parade

by Jon Rappoport

May 2, 2017

“In the long, long run, the medical cartel is Globalism’s most important component. It pacifies populations through poisons called medicines. And the propaganda wing of the cartel is so successful that citizens, watching the news at night, seeing men in white coats descending from a plane into a Third-World country, ready to treat people suffering from starvation and sewage piped directly into the drinking water, believe this is a humanitarian mission—as if drugs or vaccines could cure starvation.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

How would you assess these outcomes? The drugs failed to prolong life for more than a few months. The drugs were highly toxic and harmed the patients. Prior clinical trials of the drugs showed no appreciable benefits, but the drugs were released for public use anyway.

World pharmacy news reports a stunning study: “Analysis of the drugs that were approved for use by the NHS Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) in England has shown that the fund was not good value for patients and society and may have resulted in patients suffering unnecessarily from toxic side effects of the drugs.”

“In a study published in the leading cancer journal Annals of Oncology, researchers led by Dr Ajay Aggarwal, academic clinical oncologist at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (UK), and Professor Richard Sullivan, director of the Institute of Cancer Policy, King’s College London (UK), looked at 29 drugs that had been approved for use through the CDF in January 2015 for 47 specific cancer conditions (or indications).”

“Of these [cancer] indications, only 18 (38%) were based on clinical trials that reported a statistically significant benefit from the drugs in terms of patients’ overall survival; the (median) average overall survival benefit was 3.2 months, ranging from 1.4 months to 15.7 months.”

“When other factors such as quality of life and toxic side effects of the drugs were considered as part of criteria developed by oncologists to measure value to patients, the majority of the drugs failed to show any evidence of meaningful clinical benefit. In fact, the researchers say the benefit to patients in ‘real world’ situations was probably even less than that found in the clinical trials, since clinical trial participants are carefully selected, have fewer other health problems and tend to be younger than patients not included in trials.”

The inferences from this great failure are clear. People in important positions wanted the drugs to be released for public use, regardless of the fact that they were destined to fail, as evidenced by prior clinical trials.

Benefits (profits) for the drug companies outweighed any interest in the welfare of the patients.

The researchers in the project had to keep busy doing something—and if that meant imposing highly toxic drugs on patients, because useful treatments were not forthcoming from the drug companies—so be it.

It adds up to reckless disregard, indifference to human life, and a willingness to torture patients (with the toxic drugs) to squeeze out a few statistically meaningless “survival” numbers on charts.

Those researchers actively leading and participating in the British grand experiment could see the handwriting on the wall (failure to alleviate suffering), but it didn’t matter: to them, the patients weren’t humans.

These are the same arrogant “watchdogs” who condemn natural health treatments as dangerous and irresponsible.


Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The fluoride wars: loving cancer, loving lower IQ

by Jon Rappoport

April 26, 2016

(To join our email list, click here.)

It’s no surprise that the US government would look the other way when lower IQ and cancer are business as usual.

One of the major agencies that would look the other way is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

—But suppose scientists within the EPA spoke out, revolted, and issued official rebukes to their own Agency’s position on fluorides?

Talk about cognitive dissonance. Contradiction. “We at the EPA know fluorides are wonderful and safe and beautiful. Of course, our own scientists disagree. Strongly. But don’t worry, we’re ignoring them. And we’re keeping their statements out of the press. Our position on fluorides is administrative. It has nothing to do with science. Anyway, we support cancer and plummeting IQ. They’re wonderful.”

Case in point, going back 17 years. Buckle up. Here is what the EPA Union of scientists had to say about fluoridation:

Quoting from a May 1, 1999, statement— “Why EPA’s Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation”—written by William Hirzy, PhD, [Union of Scientists] Senior Vice-President, Chapter 280:

“…our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposures to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion. These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis.”

“In support of this concern are results from two epidemiology studies from China that show decreases in I.Q. in children who get more fluoride than the control groups of children in each study. These decreases are about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years.”

“Another troubling brain effect has recently surfaced: fluoride’s interference with the function of the brain’s pineal gland. The pineal gland produces melatonin which, among other roles, mediates the body’s internal clock, doing such things as governing the onset of puberty. Jennifer Luke has shown that fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and inhibits its production of melatonin. She showed in test animals that this inhibition causes an earlier onset of sexual maturity, an effect reported in humans as well in 1956…”

“EPA fired the Office of Drinking Water’s chief toxicologist, Dr. William Marcus, who also was our local union’s treasurer at the time, for refusing to remain silent on the cancer risk issue. The judge who heard the lawsuit he [Marcus] brought against EPA over the firing made that finding—that EPA fired him over his fluoride work and not for the phony reason put forward by EPA management at his dismissal. Dr. Marcus won his lawsuit and is again at work at EPA.”

“…data showing increases in osteosarcomas in young men in New Jersey, Washington and Iowa based on their drinking fluoridated water. It was his [Dr. Marcus’] analysis, repeated statements about all these and other incriminating cancer data, and his requests for an independent, unbiased evaluation of them that got Dr. Marcus fired.”

“Regarding the effectiveness of fluoride in reducing dental cavities, there has not been any double-blind study of fluoride’s effectiveness as a caries preventative. There have been many, many small scale, selective publications on this issue that proponents cite to justify fluoridation, but the largest and most comprehensive study, one done by dentists trained by the National Institute of Dental Research, on over 39,000 school children aged 5-17 years, shows no significant differences (in terms of decayed, missing and filled teeth) among caries [cavities] incidences in fluoridated, non-fluoridated and partially fluoridated communities. The latest publication on the fifty-year fluoridation experiment in two New York cities, Newburgh and Kingston, shows the same thing. The only significant difference in dental health between the two communities as a whole is that fluoridated Newburgh, N.Y. shows about twice the incidence of dental fluorosis (the first, visible sign of fluoride chronic toxicity) as seen in non-fluoridated Kingston.”

“John Colquhoun’s publication on this point of efficacy is especially important. Dr. Colquhoun was Principal Dental Officer for Auckland, the largest city in New Zealand, and a staunch supporter of fluoridation—until he was given the task of looking at the world-wide data on fluoridation’s effectiveness in preventing cavities. The paper is titled, ‘Why I changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation.’ In it Colquhoun provides details on how data were manipulated to support fluoridation in English speaking countries, especially the U.S. and New Zealand. This paper explains why an ethical public health professional was compelled to do a 180 degree turn on fluoridation.”

“…mutation studies…show that fluoride can cause gene mutations in mammalian and lower order tissues at fluoride concentrations estimated to be present in the mouth from fluoridated tooth paste. Further, there were tumors of the oral cavity seen in the NTP cancer study…further strengthening concern over the toxicity of topically applied fluoride.”

“So, in addition to our concern over the toxicity of fluoride, we note the uncontrolled — and apparently uncontrollable — exposures to fluoride that are occurring nationwide via drinking water, processed foods, fluoride pesticide residues and dental care products…For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more exposure in the face of current levels of over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best.”

“We have also taken a direct step to protect the [EPA] employees we represent from the risks of drinking fluoridated water…the union filed a grievance, asking that EPA provide un-fluoridated drinking water to its employees.”


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


“The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear. Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA’s standard method for controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation’s drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry.”

That last sentence lets you know where the fluorides are coming from.

So…an employees’ union of scientists within the EPA has made its position clear.

Quite clear.

The mainstream press has refused to cover this story in any significant way for at least 17 years.

In 2013, the EPA denied a petition from Dr. Hirzy calling for the removal of fluorides from water supplies. In a pinch, I guess the Agency can find scientists hanging around bus stations and bars and crack houses and get them to say what they want them to say and stamp it official.

—Scientists who’ve been guzzling fluoridated water themselves and thus have microscopic IQs.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Roundup-cancer link: 30,000 doctors/health professionals agree

Roundup-cancer link: 30,000 doctors/health professionals agree

by Jon Rappoport

April 22, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

As if waiting in scientific exile for a signal that would allow them back in the world, a massive medical group in Argentina followed up on the recent World Health Organization announcement that Roundup is a probable carcinogen.

FESPROSA, the union representing 30,000 doctors and health professionals, issued a devastating statement (reported at GM Watch, 4/16, “Argentina: 30,000 doctors and health professionals demand ban on glyphosate”):

“Glyphosate not only causes cancer. It is also associated with increased spontaneous abortions, birth defects, skin diseases, and respiratory and neurological disease.”

“Health authorities, including the National Ministry of Health and the political powers, can no longer look away. Agribusiness cannot keep growing at the expense of the health of the Argentine people. The 30,000 health professionals in Argentina in the FESPROSA ask that glyphosate is now prohibited in our country and that a debate on the necessary restructuring of agribusiness is opened, focusing on the application of technologies that do not endanger human life.”

“In our country glyphosate is applied on more than 28 million hectares. Each year, the soil is sprayed with more than 320 million litres, which means that 13 million people are at risk of being affected, according to the Physicians Network of Sprayed Peoples (RMPF). Soy is not the only crop addicted to glyphosate: the herbicide is also used for transgenic maize and other crops. Where glyphosate falls, only GMOs can grow. Everything else dies.”

Make no mistake about it, this is an Argentine manifesto against chemical warfare.

Monsanto is the attacking army.


power outside the matrix


This Argentine union of medical professionals has been chafing under Monsanto’s control, as that corporation has colluded with politicians to continue the all-out attack on the population.

When Monsanto’s Agent Orange herbicide fell on Vietnam, destroying countless lives, the company was just getting started.

It has continued its war on life to this day.

In the US, why are people spending their energy trying to label GMO crops, when the majority of those plants are drenched with Roundup? Label poison? Let the consumer decide whether to eat a poison that is affecting the entire country?

Is that the best America can do—especially given the fact that Monsanto is headquartered here?

The campaign should be: Ban Roundup. Ban all genetically modified crops that require it. Boycott Roundup for any use.

The US Department of Justice refuses to prosecute Monsanto for high crimes, since the DOJ and the FDA and USDA are rogue criminal agencies. They collude with Monsanto.

And as I’ve documented, Barack Obama is Monsanto’s current man in Washington.

That’s the set-up.

But Argentina has sent a flare through the clouds.

Keep it alive.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Deleting a promising cancer treatment

Deleting a promising cancer treatment

by Jon Rappoport

July 1, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

The following information comes from Daniel Haley’s brilliant book, Politics in Healing: The Suppression and Manipulation of American Medicine.

Haley recounts how a 1991 clinical trial of the innovative and “alternative” cancer medicine, hydrazine sulfate (HS), was rigged.

Rigged to fail.

A spectacularly promising medicine, HS had shown good results in trials at Harbor/UCLA hospital and in Russia. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) felt obligated to test the drug. But there was a catch.

The drug’s discoverer, Dr. Joseph Gold, had found that HS could provoke very dangerous effects if patients were taking other drugs, especially tranquilizers. Several warnings were given to NCI before it began its test. The warnings were explicit. Patients could die if they were taking tranquilizers.

It turned out that none of the NCI patients were warned about this. It turned out that 94% of those patients were in fact on tranquilizers.

Barry Tice, an investigator for the US General Accounting Office (GAO), looked into the NCI trial of hydrazine sulfate after it was over. He called Dr. Gold and told him he had found a “smoking gun.” There was an internal NCI memo which showed that NCI was well aware of the problems involved in the drug combinations.

But the GAO did not back up its own investigator. The final GAO report on the NCI clinical trials of hydrazine sulfate simply accused NCI of sloppy bookkeeping.

In the June 1995 issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology, a letter from the NCI was published. The letter stated that NCI had omitted mentioning, in its own published account of its cancer study, that 94% of the patients had been on tranquilizers. But, because this letter did NOT mention how dangerous that situation was, it looked like NCI was simply admitting to a technical and unimportant mistake. A clerical error.

So what did happen to the patients in the NCI hydrazine sulfate study?

The results have been suppressed. But NCI concluded that hydrazine sulfate was ineffective.

The drug, hydrazine sulfate, a competitor for chemotherapy dollars, was eliminated. Hydrazine sulfate is a cheap, widely available, unpatentable substance. No profit there.

Was this story splashed across the front pages of major newspapers in America? Did the “great men” of television, those holy anchors, insist on covering it with the emphasis it deserved? Of course not.

The story was originally unearthed and published in Penthouse, by reporter Jeff Kamen, who should have won a Pulitzer for it, but won nothing.

(Note: THERE ARE OTHER SUBSTANCES AND FOODS WHICH ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH HYDRAZINE SULFATE AND MAY CAUSE GREAT HARM AND DEATH.)

There is more to this incredible story. Penthouse publisher Bob Guccione’s wife, Kathy Keeton, who was the founder of Longevity, a magazine that was part of the Guccione empire, was diagnosed with “galloping breast cancer” in 1995. She was given 6 weeks to live.

She refused chemotherapy and became a VERY high-profile case of a person taking hydrazine sulfate instead.

She also chose radiation to reduce one of her many tumors-a growth around her bile duct. Dr. Gold said the dose of radiation should be small, because hydrazine sulfate would enhance the effect of the radiation. But the radiologist gave her the full dose instead, burned her liver and caused later scarring.

Overall, Keeton recovered. In fact, a year after her predicted death date, her cancer was in full remission. The hydrazine sulfate was a remarkable success.

Guccione ran ads in Penthouse, asking for families of the dead victims in the NCI experiment to come forward and join a class-action suit against NCI.

Guccione estimated there had been 600 victims in the NCI clinical test.

In October 1997, Kathy Keeton went into a major and well-respected NY hospital for surgery. From all accounts, this operation had nothing to do with cancer. Complications occurred. She died.

Most of America assumed she had succumbed to cancer. Further “proof” that hydrazine sulfate did not work.


power outside the matrix


Predictably, the FDA got into the act. On April 23, 1998, that federal agency raided a distributor of hydrazine sulfate, Great Lakes Metabolics, in Rochester, Minnesota. In 2000, the FDA shut down the company that supplied hydrazine sulfate to Great Lakes, and Great Lakes went out of business.

In 1996, when hydrazine sulfate (HS) was still very much in the public spotlight, Dr. Gold stated he received 20 phone calls in one day from doctors at Sloan Kettering, the world’s number one center for toxic chemotherapy research and treatment. These doctors wanted to obtain HS on the sly for their patients. Gold stated that roughly 2/3 of the patients were from the doctors’ families. And six of these doctors had refused to give HS to other patients at Sloan Kettering. The phrase, scum of the Earth, comes to mind.

Author Haley offers a dozen patient testimonials re HS. They are anecdotes, to be sure, but they are remarkable.

Example: “Oncologist report in today. No cancer anywhere, after two and a half months on HS and vitamins/minerals and supplements. They have no idea where cancer went.”

Example: “Seven weeks on hydrazine sulfate. Brain and lung lesions disappeared.”

Example: “I purchased some HS for my sister a few weeks ago. Too early to tell, but she went from near death at the hospital on chemo to a campground some place, with a fishing pole.”

HS studies at Harbor/UCLA and in Russia did not cure everyone, not by a long shot. There are questions about those protocols too, because ordinary foods like raisins are incompatible with HS-and who knows what the patients were fed.

No well-designed studies have ever been done using HS on patients in early stages of cancer, where the results might be even better.

More notes on HS (hydrazine sulfate)…

One session of conventional chemo costs enough to pay for 10 years of treatment with HS.

In 1973, a doctor with a terminal Hodgkins patient approached Dr. Gold for help. Gold recommended a dosage level. In a few weeks, the patient was up and around, not dead. By October of 1973, 1000 patients in the US were on HS.

Dean Burke, head of cell chemistry at NCI, said in 1974 that HS was “the most remarkable anticancer agent I have come across in my 45 years experience in cancer…this material is so cheap because it is made by the trainload for industrial purposes.”

In September 1973, Sloan Kettering (SK), the most prestigious cancer center in the world, started an HS study on terminal patients. The lead physician, Dr. Manuel Ochoa, had agreed to give each patient 60 mg a day for 3 days and then 60 mg 3 times a day after that-but Dr. Gold learned Ochoa was changing the protocol drastically-he was giving 1 mg the first day, then 2 mg the next day, and so on, building up to a top of 30 mg–except in some cases he actually gave patients 120-190 mg a day-brutal overdoses.

In 1975 SK announced HS was worthless.

Dr. Gold then did a study for Calbiochem, a drug company. 70% of 84 patients gained weight and had less pain. HS was, in fact, designed to alleviate wasting away in the first place. 17% of the patients showed tumor regression or a stabilization of their condition for one year.

In 1975, Russian researchers published two positive study findings on HS.

In 1976, the American Cancer Society (ACS) put HS on its dreaded blacklist of “unapproved” cancer treatments. ACS neglected to mention it owned 50% of a competing and highly toxic cancer drug, 5FU.

By 1978, the FDA was cracking down on HS. 5000 patients in the US were on the medicine. The FDA falsely stated that HS caused bone marrow toxicity. In fact, conventional chemo — approved by the FDA — destroys bone marrow.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Dr. William Koch and his suppressed cancer treatment

Dr. William Koch and his suppressed cancer treatment

by Jon Rappoport

June 3, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

“Vital history, which is to say, unwritten history, floats across our field of vision as a future that could have been but never was—unless we resurrect it now.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Dr. William Frederick Koch, 1885-1967. Main treatment-medication for cancer and other diseases in humans and animals: Glyoxylide, a homeopathic, which Dr. Koch developed himself.

Sued twice by the FDA. 1943, 1946. Not guilty. Harassed and discredited by medical authorities. Koch left the US for good in 1950 and settled in Brazil.

Despite offers, he never made the formula for his medicine available to medical groups or drug companies, for fear they would change and pervert it.

See williamfkoch.com, a site maintained by the Koch family. You’ll find much information there on the work of Dr. Koch, including scientific papers.

Here is an excerpt from remarks read into the Congressional Record by US Senator William Lancer, on June 7, 1948. It not only reveals the scope of Koch’s work, it opens up a chapter of hidden history:

“Fortunately for Canadian farmers in the Province of British Columbia, the Minister of the Department of Agriculture possessed an open mind. This fact is saving cattle raisers into the millions of dollars annually. It is assuring them of better cows, steers, and beef than previously known.”

“Such ailments as Bang’s disease, Johne’s disease, and other fatal diseases that customarily make devastating demands upon dairy herds, are no longer fatal in British Columbia. Thanks to the integrity and foresight of Canadian physicians, veterinarians, and Government experts who recently completed a series of successful experiments with the Koch system for treating virulent diseases.”

“But, be it known as a further warning against trying to suppress truth, that farmers in various parts of the United States are rising up in indignation, demanding the right to enjoy the same advantages as their Canadian brethren, Cattle raisers in South American countries, notably Brazil, have for years demonstrated the validity of the Koch treatment.”

“’We the undersigned members of the Michigan State Legislature [25 legislators signed the petition] respectfully petition the Congress of the United States, through an appropriate committee to investigate the injunction imposed by a Federal Court on William Frederick Koch, Ph. D., M. D., a pioneer in the field of research and treatment of cancer, inasmuch a. [sic] recently discovered methods of treatment [that] confirm the research of Dr. Koch, with the end in view of requesting the Attorney General of the United States to have said injunction dis-missed, so that Dr. Koch can continue further research and practice in his field without restriction.’”

“Suffice to say that Michigan farmers are not letting their herds die while waiting for bureaucrats to lift an injunction that should never have been imposed. They are using Koch Therapy anyway thereby saving themselves and the public substantial sums of money in terms of cattle, beef, and dairy products.”

“One leading breeder told how the Koch Treatment had saved an especially good cow given up to die. He explained that it developed mastitis during lactation. A veterinary surgeon advised him to have the animal removed from the herd and slaughtered. There was danger of the infection spreading.”

“Instead, the Koch Treatment was applied. The action consisted of one dose of the therapeutic reagent being administered by hypodermic syringe under the skin of the neck. Recovery was instantaneous and within a week the cow’s milk was being sold to the creamery.”

“Testimonials like the following by Dr. Wahl could be multiplied to fill several large volumes: ‘Over a year ago, my sister was dying of lymphosarcoma, a disease which the profession regards as invariably fatal. The diagnosis was made by Dr. H. H. Penner, of Mercy Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pa., on the basis of biopsy study No. 1171, May 1, 1946. The medical staff of Mercy Hospital bad previously made a diagnosis of lymphoscaroma or Hodgkin’s disease.

“’The case was far advanced at the time, my sister having been practically bedridden for 6 months because of weakness and recurrent infections. The mashes of lymphoid tissue did not have to be palpated; they stood out on the aides of her neck and in her axillae and groins like bunches of grapes mixed with walnuts.”

“…My sister was in the last stages and was said to have only a few weeks to live, according to the best knowledge on the subject. She recovered after one dose [of Dr. Koch’s Glyoxylide] in characteristic fashion.’”

“Comparisons are odious, but Dr. Koch has been described by authorities as ‘the world’s greatest living chemist’; ‘the discoverer of a new science which charts the future course of the medical profession’; ‘one who cannot be bought, coerced, or intimidated’; ‘a Christian gentleman of courage and distinctive attainments’; and ‘a man of amazing capacities.’”

“No one who knows him well and understands the humanitarian spirit that animates his every deed will deny that the foregoing descriptions apply.”


power outside the matrix


And here is an excerpt from another report, “Some Informal Remarks on the Treatment of Cancer,” which Dr. CW Allen, Professor of Medicine at Tulane University, presented to the Orleans Parish Medical Society, on April 27, 1925:

“Last October a patient of mine suffering from an inoperable cancer of the rectum asked my advice about the Koch treatment. I strongly advised him to have nothing to do with it, that it had been investigated and pronounced worthless, and that I regarded it as a fraud. He, however, was determined to go to Detroit and consult Dr. Koch. At that time he was emaciated, weighing less than a hundred pounds and was so weak that he had to be carried to the train on a stretcher. Two months later he returned to New Orleans weighting more than 130 pounds, and now weighs 170 and attends to business as usual though there is still some local evidence of his trouble.”

“I am frank to say that I was amazed at the wonderful improvement in this man. I then called on another patient here who was treated by Dr. Koch at the same time. After talking with these two afflicted persons I was deeply impressed, not only by their personal experience but also by statements concerning others with whom they came in contact while being treated.”

“A doctor friend whose wife was in a hopeless condition from carcinoma called on me to discuss the matter and as his wife was unable to travel we wired Dr. Koch and received a treatment. In a similar way I received a dose for a hopeless bladder case of Dr. Walther’s. With these treatments Dr. Koch sent some directions and information as to what would happen following its use. The results were so strikingly as he predicted that I became extremely interested.”


There are other cases, other case histories, other remarkable successes. Dr. Koch never claimed to be able to cure cancer in all instances. He was always working to improve the treatment. His departure from America was a direct result of harassment by government authorities. Their crimes, of course, went unpunished. They were “protecting the public,” if that phrase is taken to mean: guarding a monopoly, preventing cures, and killing patients.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

GMO plants, GMO people, and cancer

GMO plants, GMO people, and cancer

by Jon Rappoport

April 22, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

There is an extraordinary parallel between what biotech corporations are doing with food plants, and what cancer researchers are trying to do with humans.

The comparison is not only instructive, it reveals what the future holds.

The war against cancer has painted a picture of hope: genetic solutions, genetic modifications.

This, despite the fact that there are no successful genetic treatments for any form of human cancer.

The focus on genes is a diversion from obvious causes of cancer in the environment: industrial chemicals, pollutants, pesticides, food additives, and even pharmaceuticals.

This futile gene-fix has a parallel in food crops: modify the genes of plants so they can grow despite drenching them with toxic pesticides. However, massive GMO crop failures and reduced nutritive value of such crops are two reasons why the gene model fails.

So it is with human cancer: “let’s modify the genes of people and they will be impervious to the environmental assault of chemicals that cause cancer.”

In other words, the cancer-fantasy proposes that someday, humans will be able to live in a toxic soup created by mega-corporations, because they have been genetically altered.

There is no reason under the sun to believe this.

“Even if environmental toxins trigger gene mutations that bring about cancer, we can just cancel out those mutations through better human engineering.”

Preposterous.

This is like saying you can cure diseases caused by germs even though people’s immune systems are severely and chronically compromised.

The entire cancer industry exists to protect the corporations that are manufacturing products that cause cancer.

I made these points during a Coast to Coast AM radio interview last week, and I make them here again, because major media news outlets are silent; they are part of the cancer industry and are beholden to the cancer-causing corporations that buy huge blocks of commercials.

In the so-called cancer research community, scientists can spin their wheels and obtain grant monies to do experiments with genes and mice and cell lines forever and never emerge with results that save lives.

These scientists and their corporate masters can herald minor tumor reductions.

But nothing changes. The war on cancer is a war on people.

Think about it: “Look, we can alter the gene structure of food plants. Then we can hit those plants with huge amounts of toxic chemicals (pesticides and herbicides) and the plants will still grow. So let’s do this with humans. Alter their gene structure so all the cancer-causing chemicals in the environment won’t have any effect. It’s brilliant.”

No. It’s insane.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Would the US government let Jesus cure cancer?

by Jon Rappoport

August 28, 2013

(To join our email list, click here.)

In the 1990s, I watched a federal trial in a Los Angeles courtroom. The defendant was charged with selling medical drugs without a license to practice medicine.

The defendant was prepared to argue that a) the substance he was selling was naturally produced in the body and b) it was effective.

The prosecution moved to exclude such testimony, on the grounds that it was irrelevant.

The judge agreed. Therefore, the trial was nasty, brutish, and short. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to prison for several years.

This is how the federal bureaucracy operates. “Do you have a government-issued license to heal? No? You’re a criminal.”

I believe that if Jesus of Nazareth were walking the Earth today, in the United States, he would be arrested on the same grounds.

This would be particularly so if he were curing cancer.

Jesus wouldn’t be granted a license. No license? Guilty.

More importantly, the trillion-dollar cancer industry survives and makes its money by treating cancer, so curing it would be a major threat.

Imagine this extreme case: in a stadium packed with 50,000 people who have been diagnosed with cancer, Jesus of Nazareth waves his hand and cures all of them in a few seconds.

Now he is threatening the profits of many companies, to say nothing of the power of the government, which backs the chemo-radiation-surgery monopoly to the hilt.

So he is arrested. He is put on trial. He opts to defend himself without an attorney. He tells the court that curing cancer is no crime.

The prosecuting attorney objects. “Your Honor,” he says, “whether or not this man has cured cancer is beside the point. He has no license to practice medicine. That is why we are here today. We are simply establishing that a) he was practicing medicine and b) he has no government-issued license. That is the scope of this proceeding.”

The judge agrees. The verdict is decided. Guilty.

Of course, on another front, the major media, who depend for their existence on pharmaceutical advertising, take the ball and run with it. The networks and major newspapers seek out “experts,” who emphatically state that what Jesus of Nazareth “performed” in the stadium was mere hypnotism. It was all a placebo effect. Whatever sudden “remissions” may have occurred are just temporary. Tragically, the cancers will return.

Not only that, these 50,000 people have effectively been sidetracked and diverted from seeking “real care from real doctors.” With chemo, with radiation, with surgery, they would have stood a chance of surviving and living long normal lives.

Other media pundits send up this flag: “Many of those present in the stadium were bitter clingers to their religion. They refuse to accept science. They are living in the past. They favor superstition over real medical care. In fact, they are threatening the whole basis of Obamacare, since other confused and deluded Americans may now turn away from doctors and seek snake-oil salesmen and preachers for healing.”

From the highest perches of political power in this country, the word quietly goes out to the media: don’t follow up on those people who were in the stadium; don’t try to track them; don’t compile statistics on their survival rates; move on to other stories (distractions); let this whole madness die down.

But among the citizenry, an awareness spreads: the government is controlling healing through its issuance of licenses. That’s how the government is essentially protecting one form of “healing” and enabling it to become an all-encompassing cartel.

What would be the alternative or the adjunct to licenses?

Contracts.


Exit From the Matrix


Contracts are agreements entered into by consenting adults, who assume responsibility for the outcomes. In the case of healing, a contract would specify that people have a right to be wrong.

Let’s say two consenting adults, Jim and Frank, agree to allow Frank to treat Jim for his arthritis with water from a well on Frank’s land.

The two men acknowledge that no liability will be attached to the outcome. In other words, whether Jim get better or gets worse, no one is going file a suit. No one is going to go to the government for redress of wrongs.

The well water may be wonderful or it may be completely useless. Both men understand and acknowledge that. But they assert a right to try the treatment, because they are free.

Immediately people say, “This is ridiculous. Water can’t cure arthritis. Frank is cheating Jim. Jim is a victim. He needs to see a doctor. He needs to go on arthritis drugs.”

No, Jim doesn’t have to do anything. He is free.

To put it another way, Jim has the right to be right or wrong. It’s his decision, which is beyond the scope of any authority.

If government tries to remove that right from all of us, it is essentially saying it knows what is correct, it knows what is true, it knows what we need and require, and it’s going to give it to us even if it has to shove it down our throats. Does that sound like freedom to you?

Perhaps you’re familiar with the raid on James Stewart and Rawesome Foods in Los Angeles. Rawesome was a club. People joined voluntarily, so they could get access to raw milk. The government wants to limit access to raw milk. Prosecutors are apparently claiming Mr. Stewart has no license to sell raw milk.

A club like this rests on a contract. Consenting adults agree to buy and ingest a product. They assume full responsibility. They don’t care what the government says or thinks about the product.

And you see, that’s the problem for the government. They can’t allow these clubs to spread. If they did, contracts would begin to supersede licenses. People would wake up and realize they have a way to circumvent the whims, wishes, and arbitrary authority of the federal government.

A way through which they assert their freedoms and rights beyond what government claims.

I maintain that if Jesus of Nazareth lived in the United States today, and if he went around curing cancer, he would be arrested. He wouldn’t be charged with blasphemy or treason, as scholars state he once was. He would be charged with something much simpler and more mundane: practicing medicine without a license.

And he would be convicted and sentenced.

Because then and now, the government, in its throne of corruption, wants to protect its proprietary and illegal interests.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com